stupid firestarter error messages

This is a discussion on stupid firestarter error messages within the Linux Security forums, part of the System Security and Security Related category; In '/etc/ppp/ip-up.local', I have --------------- quote --------------- #!/bin/bash echo -e "\nreinstall firewall ..." >> $LOGFILE ...


Go Back   Usenet Forums > System Security and Security Related > Linux Security

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-22-2005
user
 
Posts: n/a
Default stupid firestarter error messages


In '/etc/ppp/ip-up.local', I have

--------------- quote ---------------
#!/bin/bash

echo -e "\nreinstall firewall ..." >> $LOGFILE
sh /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh start >> $LOGFILE

-------------- unquote --------------

Afterwards, logfile contains

--------------- quote ---------------
reinstall firewall ...
Fatal error: Your kernel does not support iptables.
Firewall not started
-------------- unquote --------------

However, if I issue the command

sh /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh start

*after* the ppp link is up, i.e., in the context
(as shown by the output from ifconfig)

--------------- quote ---------------
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:70 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:70 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0
txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:4812 (4.6 Kb) TX bytes:4812 (4.6 Kb)

ppp0 Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol
inet addr:<--*--> P-t-P:<--*--> Mask:255.255.255.255
UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:5 errors:1 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:4 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:3
RX bytes:162 (162.0 b) TX bytes:87 (87.0 b)

wlan0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr <--*-->
inet addr:192.168.0.1 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b)
-------------- unquote --------------

firestarter says

--------------- quote ---------------
iptables v1.2.11: host/network `wlan0' not found
Try `iptables -h' or 'iptables --help' for more information.
Firewall started
-------------- unquote -------------

and 'iptables -L' says

--------------- quote ---------------
Chain INPUT (policy DROP)
target prot opt source destination
ACCEPT tcp -- ns1.smart.net anywhere tcp flags:!SYN,RST,ACK/SYN
ACCEPT udp -- ns1.smart.net anywhere
ACCEPT tcp -- ns2.smart.net anywhere tcp flags:!SYN,RST,ACK/SYN
ACCEPT udp -- ns2.smart.net anywhere
ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere
ACCEPT icmp -- anywhere anywhere limit: avg 10/sec burst 5
....
etc.
-------------- unquote --------------

So, mister whoever wrote the two error messages shown above, as
you can see, "my" kernel supports iptables very nicely, thank
you, and my wireless LAN is alive and well.

The problem would appear to be that you don't now what you are
taking about.
--

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 03-22-2005
Newsbox
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: stupid firestarter error messages

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:04:30 +0000, user wrote:


> In '/etc/ppp/ip-up.local', I have
>
> --------------- quote --------------- #!/bin/bash
>
> echo -e "\nreinstall firewall ..." >> $LOGFILE sh
> /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh start >> $LOGFILE
>
> -------------- unquote --------------
>
> Afterwards, logfile contains
>
> --------------- quote --------------- reinstall firewall ...
> Fatal error: Your kernel does not support iptables. Firewall not started
> -------------- unquote --------------
>

[...]
>
> So, mister whoever wrote the two error messages shown above, as you can
> see, "my" kernel supports iptables very nicely, thank you, and my
> wireless LAN is alive and well.
>
> The problem would appear to be that you don't now what you are taking
> about.


The offending messages may not be coming from your
/etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh script, but possibly from a sub-process.
You can validate that with results from:

grep -A5 -B5 "Fatal" /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh

grep "does not support" -A5 -B5 /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh

.... and so on.

If you do find those strings in your script, the above commands may help
to understand why they are appearing. Don't know why your wlan0 isn't
found; don't suppose that's related to the first issue (!?). (Glad to
hear that your firewall is apparently working. Have you tested it?)

Best wishes.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 03-22-2005
Newsbox
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: stupid firestarter error messages

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:11:22 -0500, Newsbox wrote:

[...]

> grep "does not support" -A5 -B5 /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh
>

Oops! Believe that should have said

grep -A5 -B5 "does not support" /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh

[...]

> Best wishes.


Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 03-22-2005
user
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: stupid firestarter error messages

Newsbox wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:11:22 -0500, Newsbox wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>
>>grep "does not support" -A5 -B5 /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh
>>

>
> Oops! Believe that should have said
>
> grep -A5 -B5 "does not support" /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh
>
> [...]
>
>
>>Best wishes.

>
>



[root]:/etc/firestarter/$ grep -i -A5 -B5 support firestarter.sh
[root]:/etc/firestarter/$

i.e., nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 03-22-2005
user
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: stupid firestarter error messages

user wrote:
> Newsbox wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:11:22 -0500, Newsbox wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>
>>> grep "does not support" -A5 -B5 /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh
>>>

>>
>> Oops! Believe that should have said
>> grep -A5 -B5 "does not support" /etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>

....
>
>
> [root]:/etc/firestarter/$ grep -i -A5 -B5 support firestarter.sh
> [root]:/etc/firestarter/$
>
> i.e., nothing.



However, the file '/etc/firestarter/firewall' contains

-------------- quote -------------
# Make sure the test chains does not exist
$IPT -F test 2> /dev/null
$IPT -X test 2> /dev/null
if [ "$NAT" = "on" ]; then
$IPT -t nat -F test 2> /dev/null
$IPT -t nat -X test 2> /dev/null
fi

# Iptables support check, mandatory feature
if [ "`$IPT -N test 2>&1`" ]; then
echo Fatal error: Your kernel does not support iptables.
return 100
fi
------------- unquote ------------

The intent of

$IPT -t nat -F test 2> /dev/null
$IPT -t nat -X test 2> /dev/null

would appear to be to flush any iptables chain named "test"
and the intent of

if [ "`$IPT -N test 2>&1`" ]; then
echo Fatal error: Your kernel does not support iptables.
return 100
fi

would appear to be to try to then create an iptables chain named "test"
and, failing that, to issue the error message in question.

Question is, why does this test fail when
'/etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh'
(which sources '/etc/firestarter/firewall') is invoked from
'/etc/ppp/ip-up.local',
yet succeed when '/etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh' is invoked from the
command line?

Anyone?

--
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 03-23-2005
Newsbox
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: stupid firestarter error messages

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 05:36:58 +0000, user wrote:

> user wrote:
>> Newsbox wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:11:22 -0500, Newsbox wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>


> Question is, why does this test fail when
> '/etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh'
> (which sources '/etc/firestarter/firewall') is invoked from
> '/etc/ppp/ip-up.local',
> yet succeed when '/etc/firestarter/firestarter.sh' is invoked from the
> command line?
>
> Anyone?


Does:

[root]# echo $IPT

tell you anything? If it's set to a null string that could change the
result. ... IDK, just a thought.

http://nessus.org/

has some scanning and reporting capabilities that can check your firewall
if you don't have another way to do it. If you are having unresolved
questions about how your firewall is or isn't working it might not be a
bad idea to check that it is indeed doing what you think and hope for.
Knowledge for its own sake might be OK, but being reassured about your
system's security and integrity would seem to me to be a higher priority.
But that's just my opinion.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0